You are here

The Old Rectory Requires improvement

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 17 April 2014
Date of Publication: 13 May 2014
Inspection Report published 13 May 2014 PDF


Inspection carried out on 17 April 2014

During a routine inspection

A single inspector carried out this inspection. The focus of the inspection was to answer five key questions; is the service caring, responsive, safe, effective and well-led? Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people who used the service, their relatives and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

This is a summary of what we found:

Is the service caring?

Staff told us they knew people well and for those people who were unable to communicate verbally, were aware of people�s wishes and how they were feeling through body language, eye contact and specific routines. We observed staff interacting with people and found there were many examples of positive interactions where staff were kind and attentive. People were encouraged to do things at their own pace and staff were patient. Most staff were respectful towards people, however we found that one member of staff did not offer support when a person�s dignity was compromised. We have advised the provider of this incident.

Is the service responsive?

The home provided services for people with a high level of need and records clearly demonstrated how care and support should be provided in line with people�s wishes. People�s weekly activity timetables had been devised around their personal preferences and activities which they enjoyed. People were able to change their minds about the daily activities they took part in and staff adapted these activities around people�s wishes. Care records showed the home responded appropriately to changes in the level of people�s support and personal care needs.

Is the service safe?

The Care Quality Commission monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. We found there were appropriate policies and procedures in place and staff had been trained to understand when an application should be made.

People were protected from unsafe or unsuitable equipment because the provider had taken steps to ensure that equipment was maintained and fit for purpose. People in the home had access to wheelchairs which were serviced regularly and monitored for wear and tear. The risk of injury to people had been reduced as items such as televisions had been encased in non-breakable plastic surrounds which did not shatter upon impact. Regular health and safety checks were carried out to maintain a safe environment for people who lived in the home.

Is the service effective?

The home worked closely with other agencies to ensure people received timely and appropriate health care when required. People received a range of health and social care services ranging from behaviour management, speech and language, chiropody, dental and community nursing. Staff demonstrated they knew people well and how they communicated their wishes and feelings. One relative told us �I am very happy with the care my family member receives�.

Is the service well-led?

People and their relatives had completed a satisfaction survey and the manager told us these would be used to inform any improvements to the service which was delivered. The provider operated a planned schedule of audits including staff training and supervision which ensured staff had the appropriate skills to support people appropriately. The home had monitored the retention of care staff and had taken steps to address issues of retaining staff. There were clear structures of accountability in place and staff were confident in their role and responsibilities.